We can use part of the new infrastructure if we simply handle abstract
conformances to Copyable, which is what we'd get upon lookup for a
nominal in the old world. This means that we can merge diagnostics for
the containment test together, and fix differences with deinit
diagnostics.
There's no good reason to permit them. Conformances like Copyable and
Sendable are pervasive, so it's as though we are permitting extensions
of `Any`. Until there's a good argument in favor of such extensions,
remove the capability now.
- replaces "move-only" terminology with "noncopyable"
- replaces compiler jargon like "guaranteed parameters"
and "lvalue" with corresponding language-level notions
- simplifies diagnostics about closures.
and probably more.
rdar://109281444
the main things still left behind the experimental flag(s) are
- move-only classes (guarded by MoveOnlyClasses feature)
- noimplicitcopy
- the _borrow operator
The _Copyable constraint was implemented as a marker protocol.
That protocol is part of the KnownProtocol's in the compiler.
When `ASTContext::getProtocol(KnownProtocolKind kind)` tries
to find the ProtocolDecl for Copyable, it will look in the
stdlib module (i.e., Swift module), which is where I initially
planned to put it.
That created problems initially when some regression tests
use `-parse-stdlib` failed to do that protocol lookup, which is
essential for adding the constraint (given the current implementation).
That led to believe we need to pull Copyable out of the stdlib, but that's
wrong. In fact, when building the Swift module itself, we do `-parse-stdlib`
but we also include `-module-name Swift`. This causes the _Copyable protocol
defined in the Stdlib to be correctly discovered while building the stdlib
itself (see the test case in this commit). So, the only downside of
having the Copyable protocol in the Stdlib is that `-parse-stdlib` tests
in the compiler can't use move-only types correctly, as they'll be
allowed in generic contexts. No real program would build like this.
Until I have time to do a further refactoring, this is an acceptable trade-off.
fixes rdar://104898230
Since values of generic type are currently assumed to always
support copying, we need to prevent move-only types from
being substituted for generic type parameters.
This approach leans on a `_Copyable` marker protocol to which
all generic type parameters implicitly must conform.
A few other changes in this initial implementation:
- Now every concrete type that can conform to Copyable will do so. This fixes issues with conforming to a protocol that requires Copyable.
- Narrowly ban writing a concrete type `[T]` when `T` is move-only.
